DOCSLIB.ORG

4. Exploring the Meaning of the Treaty of Waitangi for Counselling

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
4. Exploring the Meaning of the Treaty of Waitangi for Counselling 4 Exploring the Meaning of the Treaty of Waitangi for Counselling Alastair Crocket Abstract The NZAC Code of Ethics calls on counsellors to honour the Treaty of Waitangi. This article explores the meaning of the Treaty for counselling practice. This exploration considers but is not confined to the words used in the Mäori and English versions of the Treaty. It surveys three periods of Treaty history that move from initial cooperation through division and disparity to negotiation and restitution, and shows that this history has added to the meaning of the Treaty. It explores Treaty principles and biculturalism as vehicles for meaning. It offers a broad context for the pursuit of meaning which counsellors might apply in their practice, while also arguing that the meaning of the Treaty cannot be finally decided. Keywords: Treaty of Waitangi, Treaty history, Treaty meaning, biculturalism, counselling The New Zealand Association of Counsellors (NZAC) Code of Ethics (2002) explicitly links counselling practice with the Treaty of Waitangi: This Code needs to be read in conjunction with the Treaty of Waitangi and New Zealand law. Counsellors shall seek to be informed about the meaning and implications of the Treaty of Waitangi for their work. They shall understand the principles of protection, participation and partnership with Maori. (p. 2) This article considers the first of these three matters that the Code requires counsellors to be informed about—meaning. It examines how counsellors might explore the meaning of the Treaty for counselling practice. An earlier article addressed the Treaty principle of partnership in relation to counselling practice (Crocket, 2009). 54 New Zealand Journal of Counselling 2013 Exploring the Meaning of the Treaty of Waitangi for Counselling The repositioning of the Treaty of Waitangi as the founding document of Aotearoa/ New Zealand over the last four decades has had significant political, social, and ideo- logical effects. These effects have been visible at the national (political) level as well as in myriad organisations. NZAC (2002) has followed the calls in Aotearoa/New Zealand for social practice to be shaped by the Treaty of Waitangi. This article seeks to add to the Treaty-based counselling practice literature (for example: Abbott & Durie, 1987; Addy, 2008; Campbell, 1990; Crocket, 2009, 2012; Davies, Elkington, & Winslade, 1993; Drury, 2007; M. Durie, 1999, 2007; Hepi & Denton, 2010; Hokowhitu, 2007; Lang, 2003a, 2003b, 2004, 2007; Manthei, 1990; Mila-Schaaf, 2010; Mulqueeney, 2012; Te Wiata & Crocket, 2011; Tutua-Nathan, 1989; Wadsworth, 1990a, 1990b; Webb, 2000) by offering a précis of Treaty scholarship to support counsellors in seeking meaning that they can apply in their practice. To understand the meaning and implications of the Treaty for counselling practice in Aotearoa/New Zealand it is important to consider the beliefs and motivations that led to its writing and signing, and the meanings that developed around it subsequently. Ultimately it is not possible to determine a single meaning of the Treaty (Pryor, 2008; Royal Commission on Social Policy, 1988; Turner, 1995). The Treaty of Waitangi becomes a social practice metaphor I begin with an historical overview of political and social responses to the Treaty of Waitangi. Since the mid-1970s, when the Treaty of Waitangi Act was passed, the Treaty of Waitangi has become central to debate and discussion about both the national identity of Aotearoa/New Zealand and the culturally based identities of individuals and groups. This debate has generally had a combative character (Norval, 2007). However, although it has been at times “angry talk” (Sharp, 1997), it has also carried other dimensions, taking place in conditions: in which there was enough division and dissension among people to make talk of justice necessary, but conditions too where there was enough of a sense of common membership of a political society to render such talk more than the empty rhetoric of enemies. (p. 21) These Treaty debates, although frequently heated, have generally been positively carried on within and between groups in a national context of connected identities. I now shift to consider the problematic language in the two Treaty versions and the history that followed its signing. VOLUME 33/1 55 Alastair Crocket The emergence of Treaty discourse During New Zealand’s history the Treaty has taken on a range of meanings. For a relatively brief time, from 1840 to 1852, it was a marker of an agreement between two peoples who approached each other with some degree of equality. Then, as the Treaty began to be disregarded by successive settler governments, it became a symbol for Mäori of their unrelenting resistance to colonial domination. Since the 1970s it has come to be seen as a guide to reconciliation between the Crown and Mäori (M. Durie, 1998). As I have indicated, the Treaty has also become a primary metaphor for social service practice. Today the Treaty of Waitangi is generally seen as the founding document (Royal Commission on Social Policy, 1988; Te Puni Kökiri, 2001) or central to the constitu - tional framework (Brookfield, 1999; Te Puni Kökiri, 2001) of Aotearoa/New Zealand. This position has been hard won and was only achieved through a series of moves over the last four decades. For the largest part of the preceding Treaty history the Crown, as the institution of government, and Päkehä, as the increasingly dominant cultural group, largely ignored the Treaty. 1840–1852: A time of cooperation The Treaty of Waitangi was signed within days of the arrival of the Crown’s emissary, Lieutenant Hobson, in February 1840. Haste and inadequate consultation were the hallmarks of the Treaty process and there was the added complication of linguistic and cultural misunderstanding. (M.Durie, 1998, p. 176) The first two of the three articles of the Treaty presented by Hobson contain significant differences of meaning between the originally drafted English version and the sub - sequently translated Mäori version (Orange, 1987). Henry Williams was the missionary who translated Hobson’s draft Treaty into Mäori (Biggs, 1989). Williams chose to translate sovereignty as käwanatanga rather than mana, which had been used in the 1835 Declaration of Independence, which he had also translated (Biggs, 1989). Käwanatanga is a missionary-invented word used previously in translations of the Bible into Mäori, but for Mäori it had a lesser meaning than sovereignty. Mana more closely translates as sovereignty (Biggs, 1989). It has been argued that if mana had been used in place of käwanatanga, Mäori would not have signed the Treaty; it was inconceivable that Mäori could agree to sign away their mana (Jackson, 1989, p. 2). 56 New Zealand Journal of Counselling 2013 Exploring the Meaning of the Treaty of Waitangi for Counselling In article two, “full and undisturbed possession” was translated as tino ranga - tiratanga. Tino rangatiratanga also implies sovereignty in addition to possession because it refers to “chieftainship,” the basis of Mäori sovereignty (Biggs, 1989). Today tino rangitiratanga is generally translated as either Mäori sovereignty or self-determination (Maaka & Fleras, 2005). Mäori rangatira at Waitangi did sign the Treaty after extensive debate. One promi- nent Mäori leader, Hone Heke, proclaimed that “the native mind cannot comprehend these things, they must trust to the advice of the missionaries” (Walker, 1990, p. 95). However, the missionary advice had a strong element of self-interest. Walker (1990) argues that Williams was anxious to secure sovereignty for the British at least in part to secure the extensive land holdings he had obtained to support his 11 children; his choice of particular Mäori words encouraged Mäori rangatira toward agreement with- out their full understanding of the Crown’s intentions. With undercurrents of haste, of missionary duplicity, of Mäori misunderstanding of the proposed Treaty’s purpose, and the confusion caused by inaccurate translation it might be asked why or how the Treaty has any significant status today. Sir Edward Durie, a former Chief Judge of the Mäori Land Court, has indicated that this is in part because at least New Zealand does have a treaty (E. Durie, 1990, p. 2). The existence of the Treaty has provided a focal point for relationships between Crown and Mäori with the potential to develop a justice-based rhetoric. Durie (1990) has written that the Crown saw it as a treaty of cession (of sovereignty), but that Mäori: saw themselves as entering into an alliance with the Queen in which the Queen would govern for the maintenance of peace and the control of unruly settlers, while Mäori would continue as before to govern themselves. (p. 2) After an initial period in which settlers and Mäori cooperated for mutual benefit (M. Durie, 1998), the political landscape changed radically in the late 1850s. After 1852: Division and disparity In the 1850s a second period of Treaty history began that was marked by “division and disparity” (M. Durie, 1998). A rapid decline of the Mäori population as a result of introduced diseases appeared to threaten Mäori survival (Walker, 1990), while simultaneously the settler population was rapidly increasing, bringing an attendant clamour from settlers seeking land to farm. The transfer of Crown sovereignty from Britain to a settler government in 1852 gave settlers the opportunity to repudiate the Treaty under the mantle of legitimate government (Ward, 1999). This transfer of VOLUME 33/1 57 Alastair Crocket power from an imperial colonial authority to a local colonial authority completed a “revolution” in which greater authority was taken by the Crown than Mäori had understood to be inherent in the treaty that had legitimated the Crown claim to either sovereignty or käwanatanga (Brookfield, 1999). These moves by the settler government reached a nadir with the judgement by Chief Justice Prendergast in 1877 that the Treaty “was a mere nullity” (as cited in Dawson, 2001, p.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • From Britishness to Multiculturalism: Official Canadian Identity in the 1960S
    Études canadiennes / Canadian Studies Revue interdisciplinaire des études canadiennes en France 84 | 2018 Le Canada et ses définitions de 1867 à 2017 : valeurs, pratiques et représentations (volume 2) From Britishness to Multiculturalism: Official Canadian Identity in the 1960s De la britannicité au multiculturalisme : l’identité officielle du Canada dans les années 1960 Shannon Conway Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/eccs/1118 DOI: 10.4000/eccs.1118 ISSN: 2429-4667 Publisher Association française des études canadiennes (AFEC) Printed version Date of publication: 30 June 2018 Number of pages: 9-30 ISSN: 0153-1700 Electronic reference Shannon Conway, « From Britishness to Multiculturalism: Official Canadian Identity in the 1960s », Études canadiennes / Canadian Studies [Online], 84 | 2018, Online since 01 June 2019, connection on 07 July 2019. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/eccs/1118 ; DOI : 10.4000/eccs.1118 AFEC From Britishness to Multiculturalism: Official Canadian Identity in the 1960s Shannon CONWAY University of Ottawa The 1960s was a tumultuous period that resulted in the reshaping of official Canadian identity from a predominately British-based identity to one that reflected Canada’s diversity. The change in constructions of official Canadian identity was due to pressures from an ongoing dialogue in Canadian society that reflected the larger geo-political shifts taking place during the period. This dialogue helped shape the political discussion, from one focused on maintaining an out-dated national identity to one that was more representative of how many Canadians understood Canada to be. This change in political opinion accordingly transformed the official identity of the nation-state of Canada. Les années 1960 ont été une période tumultueuse qui a fait passer l'identité officielle canadienne d'une identité essentiellement britannique à une identité reflétant la diversité du Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • Re-Membering Quirós, Bougainville and Cook in Vanuatu
    Chapter 3 The Sediment of Voyages: Re-membering Quirós, Bougainville and Cook in Vanuatu Margaret Jolly Introduction: An Archipelago of Names This chapter juxtaposes the voyages of Quirós in 1606 and those eighteenth-century explorations of Bougainville and Cook in the archipelago we now call Vanuatu.1 In an early and influential work Johannes Fabian (1983) suggested that, during the period which separates these voyages, European constructions of the ªotherº underwent a profound transformation. How far do the materials of these voyages support such a view? Here I consider the traces of these journeys through the lens of this vaunted transformation and in relation to local sedimentations (and vaporisations) of memory. Vanuatu is the name of this archipelago of islands declared at independence in 1980 ± vanua ªlandº and tu ªto stand up, endure; be independentº (see figure 3.1). Both words are drawn from one of the 110 vernacular languages still spoken in the group. But, alongside this indigenous name, there are many foreign place names, the perduring traces of the movement of early European voyagers: Espiritu Santo ± the contraction of Terra Austrialia del Espiritu Santo, the name given by Quirós in 1606;2 Pentecost ± the Anglicisation of Île de Pentecôte, conferred by Bougainville, who sighted this island on Whitsunday, 22 May 1768; Malakula, Erromango and Tanna ± the contemporary spellings of the Mallicollo, Erromanga and Tanna conferred by Cook who named the archipelago the New Hebrides in 1774, a name which, for foreigners at least, lasted from that date till 1980.3 Fortunately, some of these foreign names proved more ephemeral: the island we now know as Ambae, Bougainville called Île des Lepreux (Isle of Lepers), apparently because he mistook the pandemic skin conditions of tinea imbricata or leucodermia for signs of leprosy.
    [Show full text]
  • Navigating Māori, Crown and New Zealand's Multicultural Relationships
    Multicultural Society Anna Zam Navigating Māori, Crown and New Zealand’s multicultural relationships Last year New Zealand celebrated 175 years since the signing of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. This provides an opportunity to think about what the future of the relationship between the Crown and Maori will look like. Good progress continues to be made on Treaty settlements; the asset base of the Maori economy is growing, and the Crown and Maori share similar long-term investment objectives to promote the long-term economic and social wellbeing of their people. Given this: Where are the opportunities for the Crown and Maori to work together to promote a prosperous, sustainable and inclusive New Zealand and what are the implications for institutions and policy making? As policy makers, how should we think about this Crown and Maori relationship alongside the trend towards an increasingly multicultural society? 1 Had Te Tiriti o Waitangi not been signed one hundred and seventy-six years ago, New Zealand’s Māori-Crown relations might be different today. Across almost all policy subsystems, there are unlimited opportunities for Māori-Crown partnerships to promote a prosperous, sustainable and inclusive New Zealand. Given the widespread opportunities available, the focus for analysis here will be on education policies, which could have the most profound impact on improving the quality of life for all. However the Treaty of Waitangi also has a role to play for changing ethno-cultural demographics in Aotearoa. This paper proposes three broad recommendations: 1. Innovate the New Zealand Education system for better cultural integration 2. Support Māori in preserving and managing land or other assets including culture 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Yearbook of New Zealand Jurisprudence
    Yearbook of New Zealand Jurisprudence Editor Dr Richard A Benton Editor: Dr Richard Benton The Yearbook of New Zealand Jurisprudence is published annually by the University of Waikato, Te Piringa – Faculty of Law. Subscription to the Yearbook costs NZ$40 (incl gst) per year in New Zealand and US$45 (including postage) overseas. Advertising space is available at a cost of NZ$200 for a full page and NZ$100 for a half page. Communications should be addressed to: The Editor Yearbook of New Zealand Jurisprudence School of Law The University of Waikato Private Bag 3105 Hamilton 3240 New Zealand North American readers should obtain subscriptions directly from the North American agents: Gaunt Inc Gaunt Building 3011 Gulf Drive Holmes Beach, Florida 34217-2199 Telephone: 941-778-5211, Fax: 941-778-5252, Email: [email protected] This issue may be cited as (2010) Vol 13 Yearbook of New Zealand Jurisprudence. All rights reserved ©. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research, criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright Act 1994, no part may be reproduced by any process without permission of the publisher. ISSN No. 1174-4243 Yearbook of New ZealaNd JurisprudeNce Volume 13 2010 Contents foreword The Hon Sir Anand Satyanand i preface – of The Hon Justice Sir David Baragwanath v editor’s iNtroductioN ix Dr Alex Frame, Wayne Rumbles and Dr Richard Benton 1 Dr Alex Frame 20 Wayne Rumbles 29 Dr Richard A Benton 38 Professor John Farrar 51 Helen Aikman QC 66 certaiNtY Dr Tamasailau Suaalii-Sauni 70 Dr Claire Slatter 89 Melody Kapilialoha MacKenzie 112 The Hon Justice Sir Edward Taihakurei Durie 152 Robert Joseph 160 a uNitarY state The Hon Justice Paul Heath 194 Dr Grant Young 213 The Hon Deputy Chief Judge Caren Fox 224 Dr Guy Powles 238 Notes oN coNtributors 254 foreword 1 University, Distinguished Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen, I greet you in the Niuean, Tokelauan and Sign Language.
    [Show full text]
  • The Dilemmas of Biculturalism in Education Policy and Visual Arts Education Practice in Aotearoa-New Zealand
    JILL SMITH 33. A CASE STUDY: THE DILEMMAS OF BICULTURALISM IN EDUCATION POLICY AND VISUAL ARTS EDUCATION PRACTICE IN AOTEAROA-NEW ZEALAND. TE KOHUHUTANGA KI TE RANGAHAU - INTRODUCTION TO THE RESEARCH The motivation for the research arose from my role as a Piikehii (European New Zealand) teacher educator with responsibility for preparing secondary school art teachers to implement national curriculum policy in visual arts education. Embodied in New Zealand statutes, including educational policy, are the principles ofTe Tiriti 0 Waitangi-TreatyofWaitangi (1840). For example, in its overarching policy statement for schools, The New Zealand Curriculum Framework (Ministry of Education, 1993, p. 1), the Ministry declares that "it acknowledges the value of the Treaty ofWaitangi and of New Zealand's bicultural identity..." The curriculum statement pertinent to my teacher education programme, TheArts in theNew Zealand Curriculum (Ministry of Education, 2000, p. 9), states that"... toi Maori, the arts of the Maori, are integral to our sense of a distinctive, evolving national identity". Further, in respect of the visual arts discipline in the arts curriculum, "all students should have opportunities to learn about traditional and contemporary Maori art forms" (ibid,p. 71).A resource for teachers (Ministry of Education, 2004, p. 2), published subsequent to my research, uses a new nomenclature - 'Maori visual culture'. Here the Ministry declares that "Maori visual culture is a living and significant dimension of New Zealand society and should be taught in all our schools with knowledge and respect". In Aotearoa-New Zealand teachers as agents of the Crown share responsibility with the indigenous Maori for bicultural development within educational settings.
    [Show full text]
  • Do We Need Kiwi Lessons in Biculturalism?
    Do We Need Kiwi Lessons in Biculturalism? Considering the Usefulness of Aotearoa/New Zealand’sPakehā ̄Identity in Re-Articulating Indigenous Settler Relations in Canada DAVID B. MACDONALD University of Guelph Narratives of “métissage” (Saul, 2008), “settler” (Regan, 2010; Barker and Lowman, 2014) “treaty people” (Epp, 2008; Erasmus, 2011) and now a focus on completing the “unfinished business of Confederation” (Roman, 2015) reinforce the view that the government is embarking on a new polit- ical project of Indigenous recognition, inclusion and partnership. Yet recon- ciliation is a contested concept, especially since we are only now dealing with the inter-generational and traumatic legacies of the Indian residential schools, missing and murdered Indigenous women and a long history of (at least) cultural genocide. Further, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, with its focus on Indigenous self-determi- nation, has yet to be implemented in Canadian law. Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) presented over 94 recommendations and sub-recommendations to consider, outlining a long-term process of cre- ating positive relationships and helping to restore the lands, languages, David MacDonald, Department of Political Science, University of Guelph, 50 Stone Road East, Guelph ON, N1G 2W1, email: [email protected] Nga mihi nui, nya: weh,̨ kinana’skomitina’wa’w, miigwech, thank you, to Dana Wensley, Rick Hill, Paulette Regan, Dawnis Kennedy, Malissa Bryan, Sheryl Lightfoot, Kiera Ladner, Pat Case, Malinda Smith, Brian Budd, Moana Jackson, Margaret Mutu, Paul Spoonley, Stephen May, Robert Joseph, Dame Claudia Orange, Chris Finlayson, Makere Stewart Harawira, Hone Harawira, Te Ururoa Flavell, Tā Pita Sharples, Joris De Bres, Sir Anand Satyananand, Phil Goff, Shane Jones, Ashraf Choudhary, Andrew Butcher, Hekia Parata, Judith Collins, Kanwaljit Bakshi, Chris Laidlaw, Rajen Prasad, Graham White, and three anonymous reviewers.
    [Show full text]
  • Historicizing Multiculturalism and Interculturalism in Richmond
    Historicizing Multiculturalism and Interculturalism in Richmond LEE BLANDING LANGARA COLLEGE & XSPACE LEARNING Personal background Immigrant to Canada at age 14 BA in Canadian Studies Further studies in Canadian history PhD dissertation on the history of Canadian multiculturalism policy Part time lecturer at Langara College in Interdisciplinary Studies Full time director at an educational startup that serves ELL and International Students Today’s objectives ‘Unpack’ the history of ‘multiculturalism’ Explore the development of terminology Discuss the applicability of concepts and terminology to the Richmond context Group activity Instructions: Do not use your smartphones or computers (I know it’s tough!) Take one minute to answer the following question in a word, number, phrase, or even a few sentences: “When did Canada become multicultural?” Expected answers: Dates: 1971; 1982, 1988….. Immigration: late-19th century, 1960s…. “We’ve always been multicultural….” “We’ve never been multicultural….” “Depends who you talk to….” “When did Canada become multicultural?” Did he mean “multi-ethnic,” or “many-cultured”? Did he mean “officially multicultural”? Was it a trick question? Is there a right answer? Will I be judged? Am I being insensitive if I give the wrong answer? Answer=Question The kinds of questions we ask in some ways determine our answers! “Multicultural” is usually not used in the same way as “multiculturalism”: “Immigration and migration patterns continue to evolve, with many former “culturally homogenous” countries becoming increasingly multicultural.” • THE OXFORD HANDBOOK OF MULTICULTURAL IDENTITY Contested terms The way that we think about words and concepts has a lot to do with which generation we were born in, where we went to school, which country we are originally from, and a myriad of other factors Words and phrases like “multiculturalism,” “multicultural,” “interculturalism,” “diversity,” “unity in diversity,” “third force,” etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Sovereign Authority and the Limits of Constitutional Democracy: the Case of Indigenous Peoples in Canada
    Sovereign authority and the limits of constitutional democracy: The case of indigenous peoples in Canada OÑATI SOCIO-LEGAL SERIES VOLUME 10, ISSUE 1 (2020), 58-87: THE POLICY OF CULTURAL RIGHTS: STATE REGULATION, SOCIAL CONTESTATION AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY DOI LINK: HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.35295/OSLS.IISL/0000-0000-0000-1101 RECEIVED 15 MAY 2018, ACCEPTED 23 JULY 2018 TREVOR PURVIS∗ Abstract The victory of Justin Trudeau’s Liberals in the Canadian federal election of 2015 brought with it hopes for meaningful change in the relationship between indigenous peoples and settler-Canadian society, with “reconciliation” a prominent feature of the new government’s discourse. But long on symbolism, the new government’s efforts have been markedly short on substance, and all good intentions seem unlikely to dislodge the more stubborn problems underpinning the relationship between indigenous peoples and the settler state that claims sovereignty over their lives. While many of the obstacles to be confronted involve familiar problems confronting institutional reform, deeper, more substantive barriers lie in the character of modern nation-formation and state sovereignty, and in contradictions that lie at the very heart of liberal constitutional democracies. Key words Indigenous peoples; liberalism; Canada; constitutional democracy; sovereignty; popular sovereignty; sovereign violence Resumen La victoria del partido liberal de Justin Trudeau en las elecciones de Canadá de 2015 trajo consigo esperanzas de un cambio significativo en la relación entre los pueblos This paper stems from a workshop at the International Institute for the Sociology of Law in Oñati, Gipuzkoa, Spain in July 2017. I would like to express my deep thanks to the workshop coordinators Miren Manias- Muñoz and Lucero Ibarra for the invitation to join the workshop, and for their helpful comments and suggestions.
    [Show full text]
  • Neotraditionalism-‐Examining the Role of Traditional Revival in Vanuatu
    Neotraditionalism-Examining the Role of Traditional Revival in Vanuatu Author: Malin Hassler Supervisor: Anders Nilsson Examiner: Manuela Nilsson Semester: Spring 2012 Linnaeus University School of Social Sciences Bachelor thesis in Peace and Development Studies Malin Hassler Acknowledgements Many people have helped me in the work for this thesis and guided me through the problems that arose on the way. I would like to thank Loti, for following me on my journey through Vanuatu and for being my friend. Thank you also Miguel and Ivan, for your support and patience. I wish to express gratitude to all the interviewees who patiently have answered my questions and for the people that opened up their homes to me. I hope I someday will be able to return the favor. Finally I would like to thank the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency for providing me with the financial support to realize my study in Vanuatu, and my tutor Anders Nilsson, for always believing in his students. ~ 2 ~ Linnaeus University School of Social Sciences Bachelor thesis in Peace and Development Studies Malin Hassler Abstract Contrary to the predictions made by classical modernization theory that ethnic traditions and religion would die out, they have proved to be surprisingly resilient throughout the world. In contemporary times various revitalization movements have been on the rise and from Africa to Asia scholars have been debating what seems to be a growing attention to tradition and culture. This thesis, based on empirical material from a minor field study in Vanuatu, will elaborate upon revivalist tendencies in a small island country.
    [Show full text]
  • THE RULE of LAW, BICULTURALISM and MULTICULTURALISM Justice Durie Introduction
    1 ALTA Conference, University of Waikato, July 2005. THE RULE OF LAW, BICULTURALISM AND MULTICULTURALISM Justice Durie Introduction I do not regard the policies for bicultural or multicultural development as mutually exclusive. I think they address different things. Biculturalism is about the relationship between the state’s founding cultures, where there is more than one. Multiculturalism is about the acceptance of cultural difference generally. Both policies may be seen to point to the need for a new legal framework to define the relationship between the state and its constituent peoples. I suggest that the framework is already under construction although the design is not yet clear. For thoughts about the design I think one could do no better than to read Will Kymlicka but at some risk I will mix in perspectives of my own.1 Mostly I seek a perspective that considers the development of the rule of law in light of social changes since Dicey’s lectures were published in 1885. New perspectives As a phrase, the rule of law captures some of our most treasured visions of democracy, equality and liberty. Government must not be capricious but must act 1 Kymlicka Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1995. I have also considered Bartley and Spoonley Constructing a Workable Multiculturalism in a Bicultural Society in Belgrave, Kawharu and Williams (eds) Waitangi Revisited: Perspectives on the Treaty of Waitangi Oxford University Press, South Melbourne, Vic 2005; Elias, Rt Hon Dame Sian GNZM Sovereignty in the 21st Century: Another Spin on the Merry-go-round 2003 14 PLR 148 and Idleman, Scott C Multiculturalism and the Future of Tribal Sovereignty 35 Colum.
    [Show full text]
  • Cross-Cultural Mission
    News and Views for Ministers Number 9, October 2005 Published by Presbyterian Publishing Company Ltd PO Box 9049, Wellington Cross-cultural mission Contents Editorial ................................................................. Amanda Wells ............................................... 3 Essays Playing backgammon with the All Blacks .............. Andrew Bell ................................................... 4 Can you wear a tartan lavalava? ............................ Martin Baker .................................................. 6 Finding a home: Asians in Black ............................ Stuart Vogel .................................................. 8 Why I’m proud to belong here ................................ Karima Fai’ai ............................................... 10 On eating potatoes in Vanuatu .............................. Roy Pearson ............................................... 11 What’s happened to biculturalism? ........................ Ken Irwin ..................................................... 12 Recognising the rural voice ................................... Stephanie Wells ........................................... 14 Fundraising II: Funding sources ............................. Lisa Wells .................................................... 16 Part two: Renewing your organisational vision ..................................... 19 Reviews Last Words: Approaches to Death in New Zealand’s Cultures and Faiths Reviewed by Joan Ross ..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of the Martin School of International Studies
    Journal of the Martin School of International Studies Volume1, Issue 1 December 2009 Journal of the MARTIN SCHOOL of INTERNATIONAL STUDIES Volume 1, Issue 1 Editors J. Chad Mann and Alexis M. Olson Martin School Staff Bill L. Smith, Director Kelli Schrand, Program Advisor Sarah M. Nelson, Martin Scholar Professor Romuald Afatchao, Associate Director Martin Institute Advisory Board Katherine Aiken Morris Krigbaum Butch Alford Kevin Martin Robert Bakes Lowell Martin Elisa Briesmeister Warren Martin Lisa Carlson Louise McClure John Chapman Sharon Scott Raymond Dacey George Simmons Verla Flores Richard Slaughter Sharlene Gage Gary Stubblefield Holly Greenfield Dirk van Beek Joel Hamilton Bob Wetherell 2 Journal of the Martin School of International Studies Letter from the Editors We as students of the Martin Institute proudly present Volume 1, Issue 1 of the first annual Journal of the Martin School of International Studies. In the spring of 2009, Dr. Bill L. Smith, Director of the Martin Institute, approached us with the concept of creating a publication to showcase the academic achievements of those graduating with degrees in International Studies. The Martin School of International Studies administers an undergraduate major and minor in International Studies at the University of Idaho. This interdisciplinary program is designed to prepare students for success in the evolving international community. An International Studies degree provides the global perspective and competitive edge in careers that help students meet the challenges of tomorrow. Each student majoring in IS selects a regional emphasis based upon which part of the world they wish to study most in-depth. These decisions are tied to the student’s language study and study abroad experience.
    [Show full text]